Every Friday from the creator of Buffy, Angel, Firefly, and Doctor Horrible's Sing-Along Blog; Joss Whedon! Isn't it great to see a feminist in the media? One who makes some of my favorite shows?
YES!
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Monday, February 23, 2009
Just a Door
So it turns out that when a woman goes around opening doors for men she gets a lot of blank stares and stuck at the door. Guys won't go through the doors I am nobly opening for them.
Now, a lot of the guys I open doors for are international students from Hong Kong and Japan, so maybe there's a cultural thing going. Even the American guys seem to be uncomfortable, a guy in D&G glasses just stopped and stared blankly for a moment before he figured out what I was doing and murmured "Oh, sorry." and went through. Strangers don't tend to fight it, but the guys I know will just stand there and argue with me about it until I prod them through.
When I read up on chivalry more than a month ago, I saw a lot of people of the opinion that it was rude for women to reject men's acts of "respect" when it comes to chivalry. The door came up a lot. More than once I read girls who were mad at the kind of women who glare or yell at guys for opening their doors. While I have never witnessed this kind of woman, I began to wonder why men insist on respecting women in a way that a good number of us find insulting. Well, it turns out that the noble and respectful men of the world don't like having doors opened for them. While the guys I know who didn't pay much attention to who opened what in the past didn't seem to notice or care, the most chivalrous men were indignant and argumentative. Gentlemen, calm down it's just a door, right?
So the point is, it should go both ways, if a guy doesn't want me to question him when he goes to the trouble to open a door for me then he can just walk through the damn thing when I do the same to him.
Now, a lot of the guys I open doors for are international students from Hong Kong and Japan, so maybe there's a cultural thing going. Even the American guys seem to be uncomfortable, a guy in D&G glasses just stopped and stared blankly for a moment before he figured out what I was doing and murmured "Oh, sorry." and went through. Strangers don't tend to fight it, but the guys I know will just stand there and argue with me about it until I prod them through.
When I read up on chivalry more than a month ago, I saw a lot of people of the opinion that it was rude for women to reject men's acts of "respect" when it comes to chivalry. The door came up a lot. More than once I read girls who were mad at the kind of women who glare or yell at guys for opening their doors. While I have never witnessed this kind of woman, I began to wonder why men insist on respecting women in a way that a good number of us find insulting. Well, it turns out that the noble and respectful men of the world don't like having doors opened for them. While the guys I know who didn't pay much attention to who opened what in the past didn't seem to notice or care, the most chivalrous men were indignant and argumentative. Gentlemen, calm down it's just a door, right?
So the point is, it should go both ways, if a guy doesn't want me to question him when he goes to the trouble to open a door for me then he can just walk through the damn thing when I do the same to him.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
So I murdered chivalry
Awhile back I had a philosophy class that didn't have enough seats on the first day. Twenty minutes into the class a boy with buzzed hair and a striped polo raised his hand. "Oh no, I didn't have a question about the syllabus," he said to the teacher and turned to the girl sitting on the floor, "I was just wondering if you wanted my seat."
She awkwardly shook her head and our teacher exclaimed, "Chivalry is not dead!"
These kinds of things make me want to conduct an experiment-- start opening doors for boys, giving them my seat on the bus, and throwing my coat on puddles for them. I could document the reactions. (Starting Monday, maybe I will start subtly integrating reverse-chivalry into my routine.)
Should I have felt relief that the guy in my philosophy class was looking out for the girl or should I be annoyed that he interrupted class because he didn't know if a girl could sit with all the other boys on the floor? She wasn't wearing crutches or anything, she was just a pretty blond. Should she have felt flattered? Should society commend or condemn this behavior?
There are ways to be respectful that aren't so deeply rooted in Christian traditions and make more sense. There are ways to be respectful that don't assume gender roles. We should replace chivalry with something that goes both ways, men and women should be held to an equal standard. I can open doors, I can sit where boys sit, I can stand on a bus. Unless I'm expected to do the same for another girl or for a guy (like help with a heavy load), then why should men do it for me? If a girl makes more money than her boyfriend should she expect him to pay for every dinner? I just don't feel that the only alternative to chivalry is disrespect or that the two are mutually exclusive.
Unfortunately, there are many who disagree. They are misty-eyed about the days of knights and I've even heard people refer to it as a time when people married for love, not money. Fortunately, these kinds of claims can and do earn the response I'm looking for. I feel like this nostalgia ignores and confuses historical facts, women benefited from chivalry because it was meant to help the weak. I don't intend to be weak so I don't know why I should desire to be treated as such. So instead of trying to act like people in the Dark Ages, why don't we try to act like people in the 21st century?
Now my question is how are men and women supposed to treat each other in a post-feminist society? The answer is simple reciprocity. Just treat me as an equal and don't assume strict gender roles, I'll manage carrying my own books, standing on busses, opening doors, voting, and going to work whether or not a guy can respect that. I'm not mad when others try to do those things for me, but I like, no, LOVE when they think through all of this and stop assuming they know what's good for me, that I might be more thankful when a guy respects my independence and lets me take him out from time to time.
She awkwardly shook her head and our teacher exclaimed, "Chivalry is not dead!"
These kinds of things make me want to conduct an experiment-- start opening doors for boys, giving them my seat on the bus, and throwing my coat on puddles for them. I could document the reactions. (Starting Monday, maybe I will start subtly integrating reverse-chivalry into my routine.)
Should I have felt relief that the guy in my philosophy class was looking out for the girl or should I be annoyed that he interrupted class because he didn't know if a girl could sit with all the other boys on the floor? She wasn't wearing crutches or anything, she was just a pretty blond. Should she have felt flattered? Should society commend or condemn this behavior?
There are ways to be respectful that aren't so deeply rooted in Christian traditions and make more sense. There are ways to be respectful that don't assume gender roles. We should replace chivalry with something that goes both ways, men and women should be held to an equal standard. I can open doors, I can sit where boys sit, I can stand on a bus. Unless I'm expected to do the same for another girl or for a guy (like help with a heavy load), then why should men do it for me? If a girl makes more money than her boyfriend should she expect him to pay for every dinner? I just don't feel that the only alternative to chivalry is disrespect or that the two are mutually exclusive.
Unfortunately, there are many who disagree. They are misty-eyed about the days of knights and I've even heard people refer to it as a time when people married for love, not money. Fortunately, these kinds of claims can and do earn the response I'm looking for. I feel like this nostalgia ignores and confuses historical facts, women benefited from chivalry because it was meant to help the weak. I don't intend to be weak so I don't know why I should desire to be treated as such. So instead of trying to act like people in the Dark Ages, why don't we try to act like people in the 21st century?
Now my question is how are men and women supposed to treat each other in a post-feminist society? The answer is simple reciprocity. Just treat me as an equal and don't assume strict gender roles, I'll manage carrying my own books, standing on busses, opening doors, voting, and going to work whether or not a guy can respect that. I'm not mad when others try to do those things for me, but I like, no, LOVE when they think through all of this and stop assuming they know what's good for me, that I might be more thankful when a guy respects my independence and lets me take him out from time to time.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Skinny Deemed Unnatural and Impossible Without Starvation
http://www.bettyconfidential.com/ar/ld/a/Detox_if_a_myth.html
Betty Confidential's Judy McGuire has decided that eating healthy is useless and size 6 bodies cannot be accomplished through short daily work outs and healthy eating.
How did she decide this? It's unclear, except that she cites this article that, if read, debunks detox product myths. However, cutting fat, sodium, and processed foods out of your diet is still healthy. (Too bad, huh?) McGuire continues to rant about Gwyneth Paltrow's skeletal figure and her desire to "shed a few pounds" after the holiday.
I'm not about to pretend that all actresses are healthy, but can we stop with the skinny-bashing? I've seen enough. At least once a week when I'm headed to the gym someone says "but you're skinny." Whenever I eat a salad someone says "you need to eat some [fattening food], you're too skinny!" In high school, girls spread rumors that I was taking "body shaping pills" and the anorexia rumors started in when I moved to a new town in middle school.
I hate to burst your bubble McGuire, but some people are thin without even starving.
If Paltrow is trying to live a healthy lifestyle, that's great and if she has a problem there's no reason to hate her for it, she just needs help. And NO I am not and wasn't anorexic, some people just need less exercise, more food, less food, whatever. Not everyone thinner than you is cheating to get there, ladies. It sucks for those with genetic or other disadvantages, but shouldn't everyone be encouraged to eat well and excersize?
Betty Confidential's Judy McGuire has decided that eating healthy is useless and size 6 bodies cannot be accomplished through short daily work outs and healthy eating.
How did she decide this? It's unclear, except that she cites this article that, if read, debunks detox product myths. However, cutting fat, sodium, and processed foods out of your diet is still healthy. (Too bad, huh?) McGuire continues to rant about Gwyneth Paltrow's skeletal figure and her desire to "shed a few pounds" after the holiday.
I'm not about to pretend that all actresses are healthy, but can we stop with the skinny-bashing? I've seen enough. At least once a week when I'm headed to the gym someone says "but you're skinny." Whenever I eat a salad someone says "you need to eat some [fattening food], you're too skinny!" In high school, girls spread rumors that I was taking "body shaping pills" and the anorexia rumors started in when I moved to a new town in middle school.
I hate to burst your bubble McGuire, but some people are thin without even starving.
If Paltrow is trying to live a healthy lifestyle, that's great and if she has a problem there's no reason to hate her for it, she just needs help. And NO I am not and wasn't anorexic, some people just need less exercise, more food, less food, whatever. Not everyone thinner than you is cheating to get there, ladies. It sucks for those with genetic or other disadvantages, but shouldn't everyone be encouraged to eat well and excersize?
Monday, January 19, 2009
Little Sperm Attempts to Escape Egg, Biologists Note Sperm's Manliness
http://discovermagazine.com/1992/jun/theaggressiveegg55
The Aggressive Egg. I have to say I was shocked. In high school the sophomore bio classes would have a sperm race- one girl would stand at the end of a hallway (our school even kind of looked like ovaries at the time) and the rest of the class would race to her.
According to this article, that's not quite how it goes.. Check it out, and prepare to have some reproductive preconceptions battled!
The Aggressive Egg. I have to say I was shocked. In high school the sophomore bio classes would have a sperm race- one girl would stand at the end of a hallway (our school even kind of looked like ovaries at the time) and the rest of the class would race to her.
According to this article, that's not quite how it goes.. Check it out, and prepare to have some reproductive preconceptions battled!
Friday, January 2, 2009
Divorce and Religion
Apparently atheists and agnostics have lower divorce rates than Christians and Jews.
-http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm
Many guess that this is due to the fact that atheists and agnostics wait to get married, tend to date longer because they don't believe in waiting until marriage, and studies have linked higher education and wealth with lower religiosity.
I'm thinking this actually all comes back to wealth. Cohabiting couples are more likely to end up divorced. If they are living together for the sake of affordability then they can't be very wealthy. Divorce rates correlate to poverty and education level. If it's true that the wealthy are more likely to be agnostics and atheists then it follows that they are less likely to end up divorced. Unlike their less wealthy religious counterparts, they are less likely to experience those other stressful external factors.
Of course, that doesn't change all the hypocrisy that results from people who want to protect the sanctity of marriage forsaking their own marriage vows and ending up divorced more often than the non-religious.
Divorce rates among conservative Christians were significantly higher than for other faith groups, and much higher than Atheists and Agnostics experience.
-http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm
Many guess that this is due to the fact that atheists and agnostics wait to get married, tend to date longer because they don't believe in waiting until marriage, and studies have linked higher education and wealth with lower religiosity.
I'm thinking this actually all comes back to wealth. Cohabiting couples are more likely to end up divorced. If they are living together for the sake of affordability then they can't be very wealthy. Divorce rates correlate to poverty and education level. If it's true that the wealthy are more likely to be agnostics and atheists then it follows that they are less likely to end up divorced. Unlike their less wealthy religious counterparts, they are less likely to experience those other stressful external factors.
Of course, that doesn't change all the hypocrisy that results from people who want to protect the sanctity of marriage forsaking their own marriage vows and ending up divorced more often than the non-religious.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
cropped.bmp)